In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online now 531 Record: 6210 (3/13/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Unprecedented penalties against Penn State on Monday morning. 9 am I think. Not that I expected it to be a slap on the wrist, but the fact that the CBS news division and not the sports division is reporting this, really could be death penalty. Any recruits we were going after?
"Kentucky Football needs to be and will be a championship contender in the SEC."~Mitch Barnhart 11/4/12
I think PSU should be hammered hard but not sure I agree with Emmert being the "king" on this. Him being given complete control just doesnt sit right. Maybe it's my disdain for him but shouldn't this go through the same procedure that other colleges with penalties go through? Different set of circumstances than normal for sure.
It smells like microwaved homeless people in here.
from the link
A source told CBS News correspondent Armen Keteyian that Penn State will face "unprecedented" penalties when the NCAA announces what it called "corrective and punitive measures for The Pennsylvania State University" at a press event at 9 a.m. Monday.
What does "unprecedented" encompass since the death penalty has a precedent?
The NCAA will announce taken against the Penn State football program Monday morning an 9 a.m. Eastern.
I agree with ya War. Though this particular case probably warrants it, what's to stop him from taking it as future precedent to do it again somewhere down the line on a more traditional, for lack of better term, violation and resulting penalty.
Though if the UNC academic fraud ever fully blows up, it may also take another action such as this, since it deals with student grade eligibility, not amateur eligibility or recruiting.
This post was edited by CatfaninIndiana 21 months ago
From what i have read and heard, The death penalty will be too easy for PSU but the NCAA is thinking of a long term bowl ban and heavy schloarship reduction.
Also it's looking like PSU might have agree with NCAA decision so I don't guess I can argue with that.
Looks like you're right on the button. ESPN reporting that there will not be a death penalty sanctioned on PSU but it could actually be worse:
This is not the NCAAs purview.
They should concentrate on Miami and UNC where the actions of the coaches and institutions broke rules to gain athletic advantage.
Just speculation on my part, but I think by the time all the investigations and trials are over (probably over a 2-3 year span), anything that the NCAA has done at that point will be a spec of dirt on the floor compared to what may happen. It's going to be interesting to see how far this sordid mess reaches.
Personally, I'm for the death penalty, simply because I don't think the college and community can truly put this behind them and recover without a complete separation from football.
I also don't buy the popular argument that you just end up punishing people that had nothing to do with it. That happens everytime a school/team is sanctioned for breaking rules.
I will disagree on this point to the extent that PSU is an institution that the NCAA has allowed to play sports under its organization.The NCAA has absolute authority to decide how a school can field teams for officially sanctioned NCAA seasons and events as long as that school wants to be a part of the NCAA. Since the NCAA doesn't really have any competition (NAIA hardly counts) they can set the rules anyway they want.
In this instance, the coverup of the PSU mess by it's coaches and athletic department does not directly relate to football. However, the NCAA can say (and I absolutely agree with this): If you're going to field a football team as a member of the NCAA, we will not condone illegal or harmful actions perpetrated by your athletic department and it's total lack of institutional control by allowing you to participate in our athletic association. If you don't want to follow our sanctions, you're welcome to leave.
Unfortunately, the NCAA has been totally inconsistent in this respect. It pick's and chooses when it cares about 'student-athletes' and university communities enough to punish the wrongdoers. The PSU case is an easy one. It can lay down the hammer in the guise of caring because it is such a horrendous situation. Accordingly, it continue this charade of saying it cares about the education and care of young men and women because they are laying down the law.
Not to make light of the PSU situation, but it just seems like there are so many times where the NCAA has slapped a school on the wrist for the failure of maintaining the amateurism of its athletes. Yet these schools keep breaking the rules because, IMHO, there are too many millions at stake. If the NCAA actually believed in its student-athlete mantra, it and its member schools wouldn't be making millions upon millions on the back of free labor or punishing kids like Jeremy Jarmon or Enes Kanter or retroactively punishing a school like Memphis for playing a kid that the NCAA itself cleared to play.
Further, PSU and Paterno didn't have so million at stake, do you really think they would have covered up this mess. I believe not. College football has become more than just wins and losses, its also about making lots and lots and lots of money.
Rant over. This post started as one thing and ended up another. I've got the bar exam in two days and my anxiety has clearly overtaken me, haha.
I believe that
- NCAA has every right to punish PSU
- The PSU situation is symptomatic of the bloated money making machine that the NCAA has become
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by BlueBloodBob 21 months ago
Thought that way at first, but keeping the PSU program (and Peterno) competitive was the main driver behind the nasty coverup. That should be taken away. I support serious sanctions on the program and vacating at least one season of wins to strip the all-time victory record form Paterno.
This post was edited by bluedynasty 21 months ago
Based on what NCAA rules and or by-laws?
I have not seen one explanation what legal right the NCAA has.
Someone enlighten me and show the written rules that covers a situation like this.
This post was edited by 7lives 21 months ago
I am who I am, said he who is. 15,235
The NCAA can penalize a school for gaining an umfair advantage. It could easily be argued that the coverup was to avoid damaging the reutatuion of Paterno and the program and to avoid damaging its ability to put a competitive product on the field, I will agrees that its dicey for Emmert to sanction a program w/o the normal process, but if it can present this as a joint agreement between the NCAA and school leadership to expedite things and put this behind them, then it will be much harder to attack.
I think the fact that the coverup was to protect the coach and the product on the field, the NCAA has clear motive to punish. I think they should make a clear distinctions that the penalties are for the coverup and the crimes of Sandusky are criminal and cival and beyond their purview.
I also believe that they will strip PSU/Paterno of Victories and Paterno of his record for all-time victories and I think it will be fully-justified since that was the justification for the cowardly coverup. I think that after tomorrow, Penn St will disappear from the college football landscape for a minimum of a decade.
Can't wait to be underwhelmed by "unprecedented."
Yea what they are describing as "unprecedented" sounds on the surface like what we got under Mumme - schollie reductions and no bowl appearances. I was thinking for sure they would either not touch it at all, or deliver the death penalty blow, but not something in between.
If no death penalty here, I wonder how they explain that to SMU?
"Ignorance is constricted awareness" - Deepak Chopra
Just a guess on my part, but I would say they are looking at huge scholarship losses (maybe only able to sign 10-15 players a year) over a period of several years, television ban/bowl ban for the same time period. Recruiting visit restrictions, fines. I'm guessing by the time it is off sanctions, Washington & Jefferson will have a higher Saragin rating than Penn St.
As Calf said in another thread, Penn St. gained a competitive advantage in recruiting by keeping the lid on everything. Their recruiting would have taken a huge hit for a couple of years had Sandusky been exposed early on.
If its anywhere close to what I've been hearing - 5 year bowl ban, severe scholarship reductions and limits on TV/Bowl monies - what SMU got will look like a walk in the park. Any time a school is placed on probabtion for a certain period, any player who's remaining years would be affected by the ban would be allowed to transfwe to other schools w/o having to sit out a year. A five year ban would encompass every player in the program (including in-coming freshmen). It would be near-impossible to atteact top players for several years (especially on a national basis).
If you've read ESPN's release (And, Chris, I'm sure that you have.), I think what will be "unprecidented" is the TOTAL subjugation of "due process", plus the NCAA completely breaking precident and bestowing "commissioner power" to Emmert.
Unless, the PSU administration signs off on this I could see this being a long, protracted legal battle. 'Course, I'm not an attorney. I'm just trying to use common sense.....That may not apply with regard to the NCAA.
I believe what is considered "unprecedented" is the use of NCAA powers to sanction PSU for a something outside its purview: level playing field between members, i.e the absence of recruiting violations and performance enhancing drugs as well as things along those lines.
As a second note, I think the reasoning behind the NCAA's justification of skipping the typical procedure is that normally the NCAA does an investigation but allows the university to respond before judgment/leveling sanctions. In this case, the NCAA didn't perform an investigation but used the university's own report as the basis for the sanctions. IOW, the NCAA skipped their opening part of the process and is using the Freeh (sp?) report as the university's response.
Thirdly, Emmert making the full decision on sanctions isn't something I see as some sort of grab for power. As I understand it, the board voted to give him power to do so in this case. This has given a quick and unified response. I think the reason the individual member schools (as of now) have not thrown a protest is that although they may in principle wish to protect their own interest down the line (as in protect not having this used as a precedent to level sanctions against schools in the future for typical charges where the system normally runs its course) is because they recognize this is so far outside the "box" that the bureaucracy involved makes it inadequate for dealing with the situation.
There's my two cents in three points.
If the NCAA comes down on penn state without conducting an investigation or allowing penn state to defend itself then the NCAA will have proven yet again how big of a joke they are.
Penn state should no doubt be punished. But everybody, no matter how devious the crime deserves the right to defend itself.
Miami is alleged to have committed some blatant and terrible recruiting violations yet there isn't a decision or a hearing scheduled.
The reason they aren't allowing PSU to defend itself from the NCAA's investigation is that rather than investigating itself, the NCAA used PSU's own official investigative results. PSU has made its official case for what happened and the NCAA is taking them at their word and using it as the basis for sanctions. The above is suggesting this is unfair because the university is not being given the opportunity to treat the official published results of its own official investigation as something other than its official version of what happened.
What has or has not happened in Miami's case is immaterial. A case regarding these type of actions (a case regarding a massive scale cover-up of pedophilia) is unprecedented. Trying to relate other cases to one that is unprecedented, and on an enormous scale, is pointless.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by rompcat 21 months ago
If PSU were contesting this decision, I believe they would go through the entire process. In this case, Penn St. is agreeing to the penalties and saying it will not contest them.
CBS is reporting part of the penalty will be a fine that ranges between 30 and 60 million dollars.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports